![]() |
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
everybody is talking about the black market. if we ban guns, they would get them anyway, so there's no point. that's like saying we should allow killing, cause it happens anyway. first guns must be banned. of course you would have to do a lot about the black market too. in norway, i'm sure we have a black market where you can buy guns. but the point is, IT'S DIFFICULT TO GET ONE! a maniac can't just get a gun without an effort. it's impossible. he would have to have contacts and look carefully. this is excactly what i wrote in the original post. of course people would still get guns, and people would still get killed. but that's not the point! the point is to make it as safe as possible. 50 killed is better than 100 killed. 500 killed is better than 5000. i never said that gun banning would stop ALL murders, or make crime go away. But it would lower the gun-related deaths, naturally. And the criminals? I never said there would be less criminals, as someone here accused me of. But a criminal without a gun is better than a criminal with a gun. now i know what you're gonna say "but a criminal can get a gun anyways"! YES, BUT NOT ALL OF THEM! We're not talking single scenarios here. That's what's so frustrating about arguing with you guys. You go, "well, you don't think there would be guns? huh? no criminals with guns? huh? drugs are forbidden, people use them anyways! omg you are wrong" im sick of this. alcohol is legal in norway. of course people would still drink if it's illegal, but LESS WOULD DO IT! if guns were forbidden, less criminals would get guns. and that would make a safer society. [/ QUOTE ] I agree with you in some capacity. We def need to make it harder for people to get guns. Many deaths are caused by spur of the moment anger that results in someone pulling a trigger. If you made it harder to get a gun, most of those involved would not be inclined to make the effort to get a gun. Would there still be people with guns? Yes. But the % would be much lower. |
|
|